Book 3: Voyager

[AD55]

Add me to those who rolled her eyes at the Gunne Sax dress. Sometimes Diana/Claire gets a little casual on the details.

[nodorothyparker]

Googling 1960s Gunne Sax (because I seem determined to waste time today and while I'm old I'm not quite old enough to remember the label before the early '80s), I'm seeing a lot of stuff that would have passed for costuming on Little House on the Prairie a few years later.  Nothing looks very 18th century at all though.

[chocolatetruffle]

Now you got me curious and I've got a few minutes to waste so....  Gunne Sax had a medieval/renaissance line.  I'll try to link a picture to an example.  Hope this works.

 

Vintage Gunne Sax dress.  OR  this one.  And ETA:  this tartan plaid number

 

I could see Claire choosing any of those and underneath a cloak they wouldn't draw too much attention.

Edited June 17, 2015 by chocolatetruffle

[WatchrTina]

I don't think she could wear the tartan one. Tartans had been outlaws in the 1760s.

[Geillis]

None of those dresses has the proper silhouette, as there is not enough volume in the skirt for one thing, Also in regard to the stays.  UP thread someone mentioned that they were uncomfortable.  Not until the 19th century's invention of the grommet, did women start to lace their stays so tightly that they could scarcely breathe.  Without grommets, a corset or stays that were laced that tight would have had they eyelets tear.  Claire's stays would have been designed to support, not constrict, just as the modern day brassiere is designed to support but not be so tight as to be uncomfortable.  The boning could have been whalebone, but reeds were also used. Some other options in place of stays may have been a bodice with boning in it for support and stability, like Jessica Lange wore in Rob Roy.

 

Unless you are young, small breasted and firm, a modern day analogy to going stayless in the 18th century would be like not wear a bra, and for most of us, the look is not optimal to say the least..

[tcay]

Claire not having stays made before she returns is believable to me. Without the internet, how do you find someone to make those? It could be done but probably not under her time constraints. As for the dress, yeah, none of those Gunne Sax look good, but I had no frame of reference when I read the off the rack description. So just assumed it looked like those old American Girl Dress as Your Felicity Doll dresses, i.e. the right silhouette but lousy fabrics and zippers. But why she didn't at least have a shift made is beyond me!

[Archery]

Claire's dress was a Jessica Gutenberg, not a Gunne Sax, at least in the original version of Voyager.

[Glaze Crazy]

"Jessica Gutenberg" is a fictional name DG used in Voyager for a line of 1960's dresses designed in a retro fashion style.  Jessica McClintock was the real life designer/creator for "Gunne Sax" in the 1960s-1980s.  That's the connection I intended to make between the two names/designers in my original post.  Sorry that wasn't clear, not everyone is old enough to have seen (or owned, or still own ;-) ) some of those dresses.  It's true though that McClintock's "Gunne Sax" dresses were more "Prairie Girl" than "Renaissance" or "Olde English" (for lack of a better description) style, but she did a few in those styles as well.

[Archery]

I guess the point I'm making, though, is that "Jessica Gutenberg," being fictional, could have been on par with Gunne Sax, or could have been more 18th century realistic.  To say, here are some examples of Gunne Sax dresses from that period and they wouldn't really work, so it strains believability, isn't really fair to the author, since fictional Claire sees a fictional dress in a fictional store that she thinks is close enough. 

[chocolatetruffle]

After reading the link Nidratime posted in the media thread, it looks like the production company is definitely planning for a season 3! Here it is again:

 

http://www.cinemablend.com/television/Why-You-Should-Excited-Outlander-Season-3-Long-Journey-73030.html

 

However, one quote from Ron made me curious:

 

 

I can’t wait to get out to sea. That’s what , doing the tall ship section... I want to do the whole sea chase; that whole section is really going to be fun. I’m sure it will be really hard and I’ll regret it as soon as I start doing it, but I’m looking forward to it.

 

It seems that Ron is planning to spend quite a bit of time at sea, which suggests that they are not going to be splitting the book in half, as had been speculated.  And that also means they are going to have to skip over a lot - my copy of Voyager is 1059 pages (some 200 pages longer than Outlander).  So I'm thrilled that it looks likely that there will be a season 3, but also nervous about how they are going to condense this book into 13-ish episodes.

[WatchrTina]

Terry followed up the tweet that caused all the speculation about Season 3 with another tweet saying she did NOT mean to imply that season 3 has been green-lit.  She said if it were, it would be announced through proper channels and not through some off-hand tweet by Terry. All she said was she was re-reading book 3 and thinking about it.  Later on she tweeted this:

Subjects I will not discuss.
1. too much Frank
2. How Ron has destroyed the show with bad writing
3. Jamie kicked to curb
4. Season 3

Items 1 & 2 I get.  Item 4 is clearly a reaction to the brew-ha-ha over her Voyager tweet.  But what the heck does item 3 mean?  ETA:  Actually I'll take that question to the media thread.

 

As for Ron being excited about the ship scenes -- I'm not too worried about that.  Ron LOVES tall ships.  He was really bummed that he didn't get to go on one they used for the final scene of season 1.  So he's looking forward to getting to film some tall ship scenes including an exciting chase.  But I don't think that means we'll be on ships for a bunch of episodes.  I'm betting the whole voyage across the Atlantic gets condensed to one episode and then maybe we'll see them on a ship again for the climactic Claire-gets-knocked-overboard-and-nearly-drowns-and-wakes-up-in-America moment in the finale.

Edited July 19, 2015 by WatchrTina

[tcay]

They hinted a while ago that future seasons could be split, and a lot of people agreed that Voyager is a good candidate for it. I don't think the ship chase/separation would be very effective if their whole journey were confined to just one episode.

 

I could see them doing a full day in the life/bottle episode (teehee) before Claire gets taken on the other ship, then an episode with her on the ship while Jamie figures out where she is and she's dealing with the illnesses, with the end of that one having Claire wash ashore. There's a lot of material there! Plus, they get back on a ship after the washing ashore/Marsali wedding business (which is when Claire gets the saber slash and the whole turtle soup thing happens). 

 

There is a lot of ship stuff.

[WatchrTina]

There was a question in the "Ask the Bookreaders Thread" that got me thinking. When Claire leaves Jamie and goes through he stones at the end of book 2 they both HOPE she'll go back to her own time, but they don't know. They've heard the legends of people being taken by the fairies and, as Jamie says in episode S1E03 of the show, "They always come back," but neither of them is sure. Claire worries in both the book and the show that if she goes through the stones she may be thrown another 200 years into the PAST. The decision to go back through the stones was made in haste in Book 2, driven by the triple threat of Culloden, the risk of Willie telling someone about Jamie killing Dougal, and Jamie's fears about Claire's pregnancy. Then the icing on the cake is the red-coats showing up at the stones so Claire has to go through them literally running for her life. There is no thoughtful discussion about steering and the impact of having a gemstone or any of the things that are discussed before she travels through the stones the 3rd time.

We, the readers know she made it back to Frank. Claire knows she made it back. But Jamie doesn't. He spends those 20 years apart tortured not just because Claire and his child have been separated from him -- not just because she may be back with her first husband -- but because for all he knows he sent her backward in time 200 years into a world even more rustic and hostile than the one he's living in. I think that's one of the fears preying on him each time he prays "Lord that she may be safe. She and the child."

No wonder he faints when he sees her.

Edited August 8, 2015 by WatchrTina

[DittyDotDot]

Okay, I haven't read through the whole thread yet as I just started the book and don't want to know everything yet...maybe tomorrow? ;)

 

Anyhoo, is it just me or does this book read like a repeat of the other two. I'm only 20 percent in, but so far, Jamie lives in a cave because he's an outlaw--hmmm, sounds vaguely familiar. Then spends time in prison where an English officer takes a carnal interest in him. Oh and he gets flogged, but only 60 lashes this time. And the flogging is because he took someone else's punishment. Then he gets shipped to Helwater to be a stable groom and beds another feisty English lass, because...reasons. At first I thought it was a brilliant way to show how much Jamie has changed and matured, but the needing to bed the feisty lass got my eyes rolling so much they almost rolled out of my head. 

 

The changing of POV has been hard to get used to though. I didn't realize how dependent I had become on Claire's internal narration. I realize it's necessary since Claire isn't with Jamie, but I'm not too fond of the shifting between Jamie and John Grey's POV. I'm kinda wishing this book had been told from Jamie's POV this time. I am enjoying Claire's romp through history to find Jamie quite a bit, though. And, I prefer that they've mostly stayed in the Highlands---in both the 1960s and 1750s--as I think that's where the story has been strongest in all the books so far. But I understand that's not going to last long, so I better relish in it while I can.

 

Anyway, got a kick out of Jamie and John Grey's exchange about long-winded writing styles. Of course they would come to the conclusion that some stories just need to be that way. HA!!!

[GHScorpiosRule]

Okay, I haven't read through the whole thread yet as I just started the book and don't want to know everything yet...maybe tomorrow? ;)

 

<snip>

 

At first I thought it was a brilliant way to show how much Jamie has changed and matured, but the needing to bed the feisty lass got my eyes rolling so much they almost rolled out of my head. 

 

 

Did you read those scenes or skim through them? Because it was not Jamie "needing" to bed that twat. She was blackmailing him and threatened to hurt his family and pretty much forced him to have sex with her. He didn't like her...didn't care for her...she was the one who had glommed herself onto him.  And no, her at the very last minute, saying she changed her mind, to me does not shift the blame to Jamie. Once you've read this and go and read all the other posters' comments--they have done a better job of explaining why I don't feel a smidgen of any sympathy for the girl.

[DittyDotDot]

Oh, I wasn't placing the blame on Jamie and I understood that he didn't want to do it. I was just commenting on how many similar plot points were being used in this book, but with slightly different takes on them. Like I said, I think it was the author's way of showing how different Jamie is now and maybe trying to show how this book is different, but I've only gotten through the first quarter of the book so I could be wrong; maybe she just really likes to revisit the same plot points? 

ETA: I only used "needing" in the sense that the plot needed Jamie to bed the lass, not Jamie needing to bed her himself. Based on my reading in other threads, I believe they spawn a child together who Jamie is unaware of for sometime. So, yeah, Jamie didn't want her, but Gabaldon needed it to happen for future things to happen. That's why it was eye-rolling to me. 

[DittyDotDot]

Ooh, ooh, ooh, I just read the part where Roger, Claire and Briana go to Loch Ness and Claire and Roger have the exchange about the possibility of there being a time portal there. Very interesting. So, I was wrong in assuming that the books weren't very concerned with the actual time travel aspects? At first I thought she was just using it as a vehicle to get her characters where they needed to be and all. Interesting.

 

As a side note: I'm completely amused by Claire and Jamie both reading romance novels. Gabaldon seems to have taken the opportunity to poke fun at herself with this book. Too cute. ;)

Edited August 25, 2015 by DittyDotDot

[DittyDotDot]

Guys, I'm getting myself confused--these books, I tell ya, too damn much plot!

 

Anyway, when Jamie and Claire are leaving Scotland on the Artemis, Jamie doesn't want to go below deck until he can no longer see the shoreline. He says he might never come back and Claire tells him he will because she's seen his grave and her name is on it. She's not talking about the headstone at the little church next to Black Jack Randall's headstone, is she? I don't remember her name being on the headstone. 

[Laurie]

It had Jamie's name on it but below the name it also said something like "Beloved husband of Claire".

[DittyDotDot]

Interesting, I didn't remember that part. Nor remember that it was a double gravestone for husband and wife as she described it in Voyager. Weird. Maybe I was so distracted by how both Black Jack and Jamie both ended up there I missed that part? Thanks Laurie!

 

So, I'm now up to Claire being kidnapped by a "plague" ship and she's now escaped and a storm is approaching. Seriously, can there not be a moment to take a breath? I was hoping to switch POV back to Jamie now. Sigh. This book was really working for me and I was prepared to give Gabaldon a nice little pat on the back right up until they set sail, anyway. She's really meandering all over the damn place. And what's with Jamie and Claire not being able to have relations? I understand why they're not sharing a cabin, but seriously, they couldn't just tell everyone to leave them alone for a while? Seems like there was a lot of down time and I doubt anyone would've cared anyway. I just don't get the need for all the contrivances and forced conflict.

 

I'm now 70 percent in and just wanting them to find young Ian and explain to me how Geillis's bones were in left in a cave in Jamaica--I'm assuming those were her bones anyway--and explain how she managed to leave that "treasure" on the island of the seals. She was the white witch, correct? Let's get on with it!

 

Sorry, just needed to vent a bit.

[WatchrTina]

Ah DittyDotDot welcome to the club.  I wrote in my very first posting in this thread that I have a love-hate relationship with this book.  The first half is such sweet torture, waiting for Jamie & Claire to be reunited.  Then they are (sigh) and all is right with the universe.  For about 5 seconds.

 

Then a French farce breaks out and they running around, careening from crisis to crisis and threat to threat for hundreds of pages.  It is just exhausting.  When Claire was "pressed" into service on the plague ship I just about came up out of my chair in rage.  Really, I can't WAIT see how the TV show is going to handle this crazy book.

 

But I still love this book.  Jamie and Claire are reunited (sigh).  Jamie falls to pieces over the photos of his daughter (sniffle.)  They are practically my age (love that).  We meet the adult Lord John (love him.)  We meet the adult Fergus (LOVE him.)  And we meet wee Ian (well, you know where this is going.) So I'm willing to overlook the absolute frenzy of activity to enjoy falling in love with the "new" cast of characters, though no one well ever supplant my love for Jamie & Claire.

Edited August 30, 2015 by WatchrTina

[chocolatetruffle]

IIRC, the cabin was so small that it was difficult for one person to sleep. I believe the berth was underneath a slit cut in the wall or low hanging shelf, at least that's the image I had in my head, so that one person had to slide underneath to sleep - and there was absolutely no room for two.  So the problem was the berth was out and there was nowhere in the tiny room that they could get comfortable enough to do the deed, especially when the movement of the ship was taken into consideration. They were liable to end up injured in the attempt!

 

Like WatchrTina said the voyage was total craziness, but as someone who loves a good French farce, I just suspended my disbelief and went with the roller coaster ride.  In this series, I'll take my humorous moments anywhere I can find them (Jamie having to thrash Young Ian had me ROTFLOL) and there are a lot, with some good ones coming up for you later on.  

 

I also loved this book for all the reasons WatchrTina stated in her post, and more.  This book is my second favorite behind Fiery Cross.

Edited August 30, 2015 by chocolatetruffle

[DittyDotDot]

IIRC, the cabin was so small that it was difficult for one person to sleep. I believe the berth was underneath a slit cut in the wall or low hanging shelf, at least that's the image I had in my head, so that one person had to slide underneath to sleep - and there was absolutely no room for two.  So the problem was the berth was out and there was nowhere in the tiny room that they could get comfortable enough to do the deed, especially when the movement of the ship was taken into consideration. They were liable to end up injured in the attempt!

 

I guess I wasn't suggesting they should sleep...the cabin had a floor, did it not? And, They did manage to do the deed on a desk, once. I just meant, it felt like a whole lot of unnecessary contrivances. It seems like all that time on the ship would've been better spent with Jamie and Claire getting to know one another again. Instead, she creates all these inorganic obstacles to that because, I presume, she wants them to be some great melodramatic reveal. I just find this type of writing to be eye-rolling inducing. Much like the blackmailed sex that resulted in a son to drive another wedge between Jamie and Claire.

 

Oh, something else I'd like them to finally get to...what the hell happened to Murtaugh? I'm guessing he died at Culloden, but it's driving me crazy no one has spoke of him. He was such a presence in the other books--albeit a silent one--that I'd like that to get wrapped up.

 

Anyhoo, maybe this should go in the books vs show thread, but I was thinking about Gabaldon's writing and it struck me how her writing really lends itself to TV very well. Her chapters seem to read more like television episodes than typical novels. Each one usually is contained with a arc of it's own, but also has threads that link it to the overall arc of the book. It seems like it's easier to digest the one hour of television weekly spread over many weeks than reading it and you realize hardly anytime has passed in the book, but all these things have happened.

 

I mean, from the time Claire goes through the stones to the time they loose wee Ian is what, a couple weeks. In that span of time, Jamie and Claire are chased through the streets of Inverness and following hijinks in the whorehouse resulting in a dead man; Jamie's business, that's barely even been established in the book, is burned down; they're almost caught by excisemen while smuggling; they return to Lallybroch only to have the melodrama with Laoghaire and Jamie gets shot and almost dies; then they travel to the coast and lose wee Ian. That's a lot of plot in just one book alone, not to mention a lot has already happened before that and it's only half of the book. 

 

Sorry for the tangent, I was just thinking, that perhaps the episode she is writing will come off rather well being as her writing style seems more episodic TV like. 

Edited August 30, 2015 by DittyDotDot

[WatchrTina]

 

what the hell happened to Murtaugh? I'm guessing he died at Culloden, but it's driving me crazy no one has spoke of him

You know, I don't think it's ever made crystal clear how Murtagh dies.  It's only made clear that he is dead . . . and that he is missed.  I can think of a couple of times in later books when something happens and he is called to mind by Jamie, who still feels his loss.  Most recently I re-read a scene in MOBY where he is mentioned,  It contains a hint about the future death of a character who is alive in Voyager so proceed at your own risk.

 

In MOBY, the night before a battle, Young Ian goes into the woods to prepare himself -- to prepare mentally and to put on his war paint -- and he feels the uncanny presence of his father.  He even speaks to him and is startled to hear Jamie respond (they apparently had the same idea.)   Here's what comes next:

 

"And what are ye doing' out here in your sark, then?"

"Washing," Jamie said, but in a tone indicating that that wasn't all of it. "And . . . talking' to my ain dead."

"Mmphm.  Anyone in particular?"

"My uncle Dougal, and Murtagh, him who was my godfather.  They're the two I'd most want with me, in battle,"  Jamie made a small restless movement.  "If I can, I make a wee moment to be alone before a fight. To wash, ken, and pray a bit, and then . . . to just ask if they'll bide with me as I go."

Ian thought this interesting; he hadn't known either man himself -- they'd both died at Culloden -- but he'd heard stories.

"Bonnie fighters," he said.  "Did ye ask my da, too?  To go with ye, I mean.  Perhaps that's why he's about."

Jamie turned his head sharply toward Ian, surprised.  The relaxed, shaking his head.

"I never had to ask Ian Mor." he said softly.  "He was always . . . just with me." He gestured briefly to the darkness on his right.

Ian's eyes stung and his throat closed.  But it was dark; it didn't matter.

 

 My eyes sting too, reading that.

 

I have a theory that in the final book Diana will finally reveal exactly what happened to Jamie at Culloden and how Black Jack Randall came to be lying dead, sprawled across Jamie's legs in the opening of Voyager.  Perhaps when she tells us that -- when the hints from Jamie's nightmares finally coalesce into a full-blown memory -- perhaps then we'll learn how Murtagh died as well. Because my expectation is that he was fighting at Jamie's side for as long as he had life in him.

 

ETA: a more explicit spoiler caution.

Edited August 31, 2015 by WatchrTina

[Keeta]

Interesting, I didn't remember that part. Nor remember that it was a double gravestone for husband and wife as she described it in Voyager. Weird. Maybe I was so distracted by how both Black Jack and Jamie both ended up there I missed that part? 

 

To clarify, it's not a double gravestone for husband and wife. The inscription is just "Beloved husband of Claire," not that Claire is actually buried there.

 

I guess I wasn't suggesting they should sleep...the cabin had a floor, did it not? And, They did manage to do the deed on a desk, once. I just meant, it felt like a whole lot of unnecessary contrivances. It seems like all that time on the ship would've been better spent with Jamie and Claire getting to know one another again. Instead, she creates all these inorganic obstacles to that because, I presume, she wants them to be some great melodramatic reveal. I just find this type of writing to be eye-rolling inducing. 

 

There is a lot of contrived plot points in this (ok, every DG) book, and I totally agree with this one. Jamie and Claire, reunited after 20 years, can't have "relations" because Jamie told Fergus and Marsali they couldn't sleep in the same room. ...wtf??  Ugh.

[DittyDotDot]

To clarify, it's not a double gravestone for husband and wife. The inscription is just "Beloved husband of Claire," not that Claire is actually buried there.

 

But, that's why I was confused, in Voyager, she describes it as one half of a "marriage" headstone--a stone made to fit with another stone to make a full arch together, usually made for two people who are married and buried beside each other. I didn't recall it being described that way in DiA, so I wasn't sure if it was the same one she was talking about. It could be that someone just placed a headstone there in remembrance of Jamie, but doesn't mean he's actually buried there. I just wondered if she was setting up that Claire found another grave site also?

You know, I don't think it's ever made crystal clear how Murtagh dies.  It's only made clear that he is dead . . . and that he is missed.  I can think of a couple of times in later books when something happens and he is called to mind by Jamie, who still feels his loss.  Most recently I re-read a scene in MOBY where he is mentioned,  It's not much of a spoiler but I'll slip behind the spoiler bars because, etiquette.

 

In MOBY, the night before a battle, Young Ian goes into the woods to prepare himself -- to prepare mentally and to put on his war paint -- and he feels the uncanny presence of his father.  He even speaks to him and is startled to hear Jamie respond (they apparently had the same idea.)   Here's what comes next:

 

"And what are ye doing' out here in your sark, then?"

"Washing," Jamie said, but in a tone indicating that that wasn't all of it. "And . . . talking' to my ain dead."

"Mmphm.  Anyone in particular?"

"My uncle Dougal, and Murtagh, him who was my godfather.  They're the two I'd most want with me, in battle,"  Jamie made a small restless movement.  "If I can, I make a wee moment to be alone before a fight. To wash, ken, and pray a bit, and then . . . to just ask if they'll bide with me as I go."

Ian thought this interesting; he hadn't known either man himself -- they'd both died at Culloden -- but he'd heard stories.

"Bonnie fighters," he said.  "Did ye ask my da, too?  To go with ye, I mean.  Perhaps that's why he's about."

Jamie turned his head sharply toward Ian, surprised.  The relaxed, shaking his head.

"I never had to ask Ian Mor." he said softly.  "He was always . . . just with me." He gestured briefly to the darkness on his right.

Ian's eyes stung and his throat closed.  But it was dark; it didn't matter.

 

 My eyes sting too, reading that.

 

I have a theory that in the final book Diana will finally reveal exactly what happened to Jamie at Culloden and how Black Jack Randall came to be lying dead, sprawled across Jamie's legs in the opening of Voyager.  Perhaps when she tells us that -- when the hints from Jamie's nightmares finally coalesce into a full-blown memory -- perhaps then we'll learn how Murtagh died as well. Because my expectation is that he was fighting at Jamie's side for as long as he had life in him.

 

Thanks for that WatchrTina. At least I know he hasn't been totally forgotten. I'm imagining also that Murtagh would've stayed by Jamie's side till the bitter end.

[Laurie]

I don't remember which book it's in but there is a scene where Jamie recalls how Murtaugh died and what he said. Jamie recalls more and more about what happened at Culloden as the books go on.

[chocolatetruffle]

Perhaps I didn't explain myself well - I meant that there wasn't enough room for ONE person to sleep comfortably, let alone two adult bodies trying to engage in an intimate act. It may be a plot contrivance, but IMO it was fairly minor. Now once you get into the next book, we can talk about the unending stream of annoying, throw-me-out-of-the-story plot contrivances. But as for this one, I can sail past it. YMMV, of course.

[DittyDotDot]

Oh, I understood what you meant, chocolatetruffle, but that wasn't how it was presented in the book, IMO. There was enough room in that cabin for them to do the deed on the desk and Claire and Marsali's room was supposed to be even larger, not to mention, they had a whole ship to go find a place to get busy. Jamie says he was a fool for making that stipulation because it meant he couldn't be with Claire. Which suggests they would've had relations--tiny cabin or not--if he and Claire were sharing the same room.

 

To me, it was presented as, they couldn't have sex because Fergus and Marsai weren't allowed. Like they had to be some sort of example to Fergus and Marsali. The one time they did have sex, the were sneaking away after the shark and pelican incident while everyone else wasn't paying attention--as though anyone would've cared anyway. The whole thing was just silly to me. 

 

I'm not saying I was hoping for a whole bunch of sex scenes, just that it seemed like a bunch of silliness so Claire and Jamie couldn't learn each other's secrets before the big dramatic reveal. Which was already a bit silly considering they didn't have to be having sex for Jamie to disclose he had had a son. They had plenty of time to talk, but reading those passages felt like Gabaldon was trying to make excuses for why they didn't talk.

[lianau]

I think they couldn't have sex because they couldn't find a secluded , clean (no rats) spot on the ship 

[DittyDotDot]

Okay, after Jamie rode onto that beach as Captain Alessandro...that's it, I give up. I just can't take this book seriously anymore. I've decided to just embrace the wack-a-doo.

 

If nothing else, Jamie and Claire's exchange about which one of them is crazier was entertaining and rather charming. 

 

Embrace the wack-a-doo! Embrace it I say!

[DittyDotDot]

So, apparently it is never going to be explained how it was Jamie came to be Captain Alessandro in the span of a day? Nor am I ever to understand what they did with those French soldiers they locked in their hold? Sigh.

 

However, I am glad of the Murtagh talk. That was a really well-written passage. I had to wade through a rather ridiculous pirate attack to get to it, but I think it was worth it. It made me realize how much I prefer the books when the characters are in the Highlands. They just don't seem to fit right when they leave Scotland and the places they go to never seem to feel as real as Scotland does. Isn't that interesting since, as I understand, Gabaldon herself had never been to Scotland until after she wrote the first book?

 

So, this Governor's Ball...no good can possibly come from this hair-brained scheme, can it?

Edited August 31, 2015 by DittyDotDot

[chocolatetruffle]

I'm not saying I was hoping for a whole bunch of sex scenes, just that it seemed like a bunch of silliness so Claire and Jamie couldn't learn each other's secrets before the big dramatic reveal. Which was already a bit silly considering they didn't have to be having sex for Jamie to disclose he had had a son. They had plenty of time to talk, but reading those passages felt like Gabaldon was trying to make excuses for why they didn't talk.

 

Well, just to give you a heads up, people not talking to each other (for no other reason than to further the plot) is a chronic recurring theme throughout the future books.  They are still worth reading though - I'm on #7 right now and fully intend to finish the series!

 

ETA: weird double-posting going on.

Edited August 31, 2015 by chocolatetruffle

[DittyDotDot]

Oh, I figured it was a thing with her...just read the part of them showing up at the governor's ball and Jamie didn't bother to give Claire even the basics. Seems rather foolish to try and pull off a hair-brained con when your fellow con-artists don't know enough not to give up the jig.

 

Ah well, like I said, embrace the whack-a-do!

[DittyDotDot]

Okay, I finished it and waded through the whole thread. Sorry that some my own thoughts echoed ones already talked about. I didn't want to read the thread until I was done with the book.

 

Anyhoo, when it's all said and done, I feel rather underwhelmed. It's not just the sheer amount of plot because, let's be honest, the first two books were jammed packed as well, I just feel like there wasn't a lot of focus to this book. Seemed to meander and weave all over the damn place. And, I'm disappointed in how not many of the side characters seemed to jump out at me. They felt very underdeveloped compared to the Dougals and Murtaghs and Ferguses of the first two books. Even the most minor of characters in the first two books--like say Mrs. Fitzgibbons--felt complete, but I had to keep checking the X-ray on my kindle to remind me of who some of the gang was here. 

 

It's interesting about he stone circle on Hispanola, but some of the Geillius stuff seemed like Gabaldon trying too hard to make sure we understood she was bad to the bone. Like we didn't already know that she was bat-shit loony tunes from the first book. Even before she killed her husband I knew something was just off with her. And, I doubt it was her brain being eaten away by syphilis, either.

 

That might be my biggest frustration with Gabaldon's writing, though. She spends a lot of time making excuses or over-explaining why things can or can't happen instead of just letting them happen organically and letting the reader come to the conclusion themselves.

 

Okay, thinky thoughts before I start the next book--yes, of course I'm gonna read the next book, can't stop now, right?--

• So, was Ian hearing the stones like Claire was or was it just his imagination when he was yelling "Oh God, I can hear her" as they were leaving the cave? It could be interesting if Ian could travel, but Jamie can't.
• Not sure how I feel about them landing in Georgia as I prefer the story, so far, when they're in the Highlands. But, I'll wait and see, maybe I'll adore it? 
• This Lawrence Stern fellow, I don't know why, but I don't trust him. I was sure he was leading the prey (Jamie and Claire) to the spider (Geillus). Can't seem to actually figure out what it is about him that makes me uneasy.

 

That's it, I'll shut up. For now, anyway.

[DittyDotDot]

I had the strangest dream last night involving the piece of plastic wrap Claire let float away when she returns to the past. I don't remember it all, but the dream followed the plastic wrap and everything that it saw and such. Anyway, I woke up thinking of how I kinda wish Claire had taken it to Jamie. I understand it was a metaphor for her leaving the future behind, but I can just imagine Jamie's delight at seeing such a thing. And, got me to wondering--he being a thrifty Scot and all--all the different things he might find use for it? 

Edited November 16, 2015 by DittyDotDot

[Bort]

Jamie seemed to be thrilled enough at the concept of photographs. Besides, the plastic wrap was only big enough for a sandwich, I can't imagine they'd get a whole lot of use for it. Too bad ziplocks weren't invented yet.

[DittyDotDot]

I don't know, I came up with a few uses...one of them being that they would not have needed all those seeds and tansy seed oil later. But the way those two go at it, probably not be all that useful in that area after all. ;)

 

I just remembered about the zipper too. I'm now wondering what the seamstress at the whorehouse made of that.

[Petunia846]

Didn't Claire say the stack of photographs was wrapped in something waterproof? I always imagined that she'd put plastic wrap around them too.

[DittyDotDot]

Hmmm? I can't remember, but that would make sense. I'll have to go back and read that part.

[Bort]

She did, she had the pictures wrapped in plastic, I forgot about it.

[DittyDotDot]

So, I just re-read that part--why no, I'm not obsessed...it's not like I'm having dreams or anything--and she just describes it as a "waterproof wrapping". It could've been some sort of water resistant fabric, though. But now I'm wondering what happened to the waterproof wrapper, whatever it was? It seems like later in the book when Jamie's carrying the photos around in his jacket pocket they aren't wrapped in anything. Not that it matters or anything, I've just been thinking about all the things she could've brought back with her that could innocently influence inventions in the past. 

Edited November 17, 2015 by DittyDotDot

[Petunia846]

I totally thought about that too...how later he just seems to carry them around loose. I'd think he'd want them tucked away somewhere a) safe, and b) where people wouldn't be able to see them if they happened to fall out of his pocket or if he got pickpocketed. I always assumed it was plastic wrap that Claire used on them, because in my opinion there's not anything else that would be that water tight...waterproof fabric doesn't have that cling to it that makes a good seal around an object. But who knows. :)

 

I recently read another time traveler story where the main character had their iPad with them and a solar charger. Very clever. Poor Claire...things just weren't that high tech yet. Some of her pictures were even black and white.

[lianau]

 

I recently read another time traveler story where the main character had their iPad with them and a solar charger. Very clever. Poor Claire...things just weren't that high tech yet. Some of her pictures were even black and white.

But what are you going to do with an iPad without wi fi ? 

[Athena]

But what are you going to do with an iPad without wi fi ? 

 

You can store books, PDFs, and reference material. There are a lot of apps that don't require an active internet connection either e.g. some games don't require it. For entertainment, photos and music don't need wifi either.

[Petunia846]

She took pictures of the hot historical guy she fell in love with, and videos, so when she went back people believed her and she had something to remember him by. And yes, the old timey guy read all her books and fell in love with rock music.

[Petunia846]

Did any of you see Matt Roberts had posted a picture on Twitter of the page from Voyager from right before Claire goes into the print shop? He got a ton of comments on it, and then this morning I saw he had posted a little poll...which J&C moment is more important (or something like that...I don't remember the exact wording) and the choices were the wedding or the print shop. When I voted the print shop was winning about 75% to 25%. I wonder if he was a bit surprised and I wonder if that realization will impact how they go into S3 (which I know is not official, but come on, we're going to get it). I can't find the poll on his feed anymore. I was going to go check what the later outcome was. I really thought about it for a moment before I voted and I really do think the print shop scene is a bigger Jaime and Claire moment than the wedding. They didn't really know each other at the wedding. It's important obviously, but it's not the same as the sacrifices Claire makes to come back and they pure joy that Jaime gets from having his dreams of Claire become reality again. Neither of them thought that would ever happen. It's just so full of emotions.

[Nidratime]

Very interesting. Makes me feel good about a renewal for a season 3 ... at least.

[lianau]

Wasn't there an idea floating around of splitting book three into two seasons . The print shop would be the perfect season ending  cliff hanger .

[WatchrTina]

 

Wasn't there an idea floating around of splitting book three into two seasons . The print shop would be the perfect season ending  cliff hanger .

I think that is an interesting idea lianau but that would mean that Jamie and Claire would be separated for almost an entire season.  Since their relationship is really the central story, I don't think it would work.  Imagine an entire season focused on Jamie recovering from his Culloden wounds, then hiding in a cave, then going to prison, escaping, returning, going to the horse farm, fathering a child, and finally, leaving Helwater. And while that is going on we see Claire in the 20th century, doing what? Packing?

 

I really do not envy the creative team the task of figuring out how to adapt Book 3 for the screen.  The good news is that Caitriona -- who worked SO hard in the first season (was in almost every scene of the first 8 episodes) -- should have a much easier time of it in season 3 because Jamie's pre-reunion story is, I presume, going to get much more screen time then Claire's.

Edited December 3, 2015 by WatchrTina